When Accountability Now - a new national PAC - rolled out a couple of weeks ago, there were some dustups about what its purpose was. Were founders like Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos and Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake and the high-octane groups aligning with them really going flat out after moderate electeds of their own party? That's the kind of thing some of the headlines suggested.
But Accountability Now's new Executive Director Jeff Hauser, who ran Dennis Shulman's interesting but ultimately unsuccessful challenge to Rep. Scott Garrett last year, has it clear:
He talks about watching Democrats, the new power, being showered with lobbyist attention, and the risk that incumbents of his own party might begin to toe K Street's line or succumb to D.C. groupthink, just like Republicans did. The rationale makes sense. Incumbency is a cushy advantage; reelection almost a reflexive privilege. That leaves incumbents vulnerable to losing touch with their own districts, and caving to the demands of corporate interests. The organizational support AN hopes to provide - to challengers - is designed to making it more likely that if incumbents get out of touch they'll have a serious primary challenge. It's designed to get them looking over their shoulder and not too comfortably. Incumbents doing right by their districts, he says, have little to fear from AN.
How will AN zero in on their targets? Watershed votes on issues like economic recovery, the budget, healthcare, Employee Free Choice, energy/climate change and immigration reform will be watched. And polling will study the districts.
Hauser sat down for an on line chat with Blue Jersey yesterday. He calls the current system dysfunctional:
[snip] Unlike you or I, who are reviewed in our work constantly, members of Congress too often get a free pass.
AN wants to connect prospective candidates - viable candidates with fundraising mojo or the clear ability to attract resources - with national, people-powered movements, like MoveOn, SEIU, DailyKos, ColorOfChange.org, 21st Century Democrats and BlogPAC. And Democracy for America (DFA).
DFA Chair Jim Dean called in on Blue Jersey Radio last night, to underscore DFA's enthusiasm for the way vigorous primaries empower voters. Dean:
If this party embraces that, we're going to be around end prosper for a long time. But if it reverts to the power of incumbency we saw during the Clinton administration we're going to be out on our ass.
I thought this guest post by Dennis Shulman, last year's NJ5 Democratic candidate for Congress, at Down With Tyranny was pretty interesting. He describes how, even in New Jersey, there's heavy anti-union pressure:
Too many times during the last year, at campaign fund raisers, people who had large interests in manufacturing would approach me to 'discuss' my position on the Employee Free Choice Act. Although my factory experience from the 1960's outweighed the pressure exerted in 2008 every time, the campaign system favors manufacturers with money to contribute to the candidate. Let us hope as EFCA is being discussed and voted on in Congress this week that our representatives vote for what is right and fair and in the best interest of our nation, and not for what is personally lucrative.
What Shulman encountered was condemned by Adam Smith himself, the hero of free market economics:
People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices.
This was a remarkable year.
A year that was peopled by thousands.
A year that found me:
In countless county and neighborhood fairs;
In Capitol Hill offices and parties;
At high school football games;
Marching in parades on Memorial Day, July Fourth, and Halloween, surrounded by enthusiastic supporters and some not-so-well-wishers;
On the pages of the New York Times and the New Yorker, on Blue Jersey, the Huffington Post, and the Daily Kos;
In campaign caravans rushing from Alpine to Phillipsburg;
In a union hall speaking to a hundred or so sheet metal apprentices, after investing five years of their life mastering their trade, unsure now if there will be work when they graduate;
In spacious living rooms, sipping champagne and munching hors d'oeuvres with governors and senators;
In Ringwood, touring a desolate track of land poisoned by Ford, surrounded by the Ramapo Mountain Indians who were this land's owners, its victims, its defenders.
This was truly a remarkable year.
And what I heard wherever I traveled this year was that people, whether affluent or impoverished, young or the retired, Republican or Democrat, were worried -- worried about their children, worried about their future, worried about our country.
Political campaigns these days have a way, too often, of getting lost in the contest between the two individuals vying for the seat. They become something closer to a food fight than a comparison of ideas and issues and alternative visions for America'
s future. They become a competition about "Gotcha," and in the process the more personal accusations drown out the political differences that really do matter. There are many reasons why this happens in this political climate, many reasons why this happened in the congressional race between Scott Garrett and myself, but that analysis is for another time and another place.
This race for the United States House of Representatives in NJ-5 should not have been about Scott Garrett or Dennis Shulman. It should have been about the contrasting political ideology and moral vision of the opponents. It should have been about the future of America. It should have been about the soul of our country and of our district.
It should have been about global warming and alternatives to oil and gas -- whether we should support increases in fuel efficiency and investment in wind, solar, and bio fuels.
It should have been about stem cell research -- whether we should provide the scientific community an incentive and the freedom to do the research here in the United States that could offer hope and cure for people with Alzheimer's Disease, Parkinson's, and spinal cord injuries.
It should have been about taxes -- whether any representative who voted for a war that is costing us ten billion dollars a month, who voted against the Alternative Minimum Tax every time it came to the House floor, and voted for every one of the Bush budgets could honestly claim to be a fiscal conservative and a tax cutter.
It should have been about healthcare for children -- whether there was any moral justification for a congressman or congresswoman who makes more than 165 thousand dollars a year accepting a premium healthcare plan paid fully by federal funds for his or her family, but votes to deny healthcare to a family of four who makes twenty-five thousand dollars a year living in Dumont or Cresskill or Newton.
It should have been about reproductive choice -- whether the people in this district agree with the incumbent that abortions should be illegal even when the pregnant woman was a victim of rape or of incest.
It should have been about our sacred responsibility to our young men and women returning from Iraq and Afghanistan -- whether we should support any congressman or congresswoman who would vote against medical benefits and other needed services for our disabled vets, and against tuition and housing benefits for those who returned to us able bodied.
Instead, sadly, incredibly, ridiculously, our election was about whether I was patriotic enough or in league with terrorists, and whether Scott Garrett had a farm or just a tax dodge.
Would the results on November 4th have been different if this election were about the comparative moral vision and political sensibilities of the candidates? I don't know.
But what I do know from this extraordinary year of my life is that everyone I met, irrespective of where they lived in the district and where they sat on the political spectrum, believed that the past eight years have been disastrous years -- that these have been years when our great and beloved nation has lost its way, and that we, as a nation, are certainly better than this.
Although I will not be taking a seat in Congress in January, I am hopeful about our country. I am hopeful that, with a new president and with Scott Garrett's positions becoming even more marginalized in the House, that our country will again find its way.
To all, in this past year, whom I have touched, and who have touched me:
After a disappointing 14% loss in a year when Democrats made gains all across the country NJ-5 can seem like a lost cause. At the least, I thought we would build upon Paul Aronsohn's gains and put Garrett in a vulnerable position going into 2010 and redistricting. Unfortunately, that didn't happen and will make national and statewide support more unlikely in the next election cycle. That's fine, as Assemblywoman Stender learned the hard way, you can't win elections without the interests within the district being organized and motivated.
There are several steps that can be taken to building an infrastructure, with an emphasis on a town-by-town basis, to keep constituents aware of Garrett's abysmal record and allow the candidate in 2010 to hit the ground running with a fully functioning field operation.
To start I think we need a district blog, which can hopefully recruit bloggers from this site that can cover all of the geographic regions of the district. By recruiting local bloggers from separate parts of the district we can establish what the concerns are on the local level and give the eventual candidate a platform of issues (and hopefully shortcomings on Garrett's part) that the eventual nominee can exploit. Moreover, we can recruit local Democratic Mayors and elected officials to author Op-Eds on the site to voice their concerns and raise the issues that Garrett isn't delivering on.
With one of us being a resident of the fifth district and having to be represented by the odious Scott Garrett, we had hopes that this may be the year that he would be sent home for good. However, even with polls indicating that the race was closing and closing fast over the last few weeks, as well as a pretty unfavorable view of the incumbent Garrett, major endorsements for challenger Dennis Shulman (a candidate with one of the best backgrounds, personalities and personal stories of this entire cycle) and events with prominent and popular Democratic Congressmen and Senators, three debates where Garrett looked the damn fool and a final week influx of $85,000 by the DCCC, the final results ended up being closer to 2004 than continuing to close the gap that 2006 challenger Paul Aronsohn was able to cut to near single digits.
And with this, we started to wonder how a race that, by many accounts, was potentially a tossup, ended up a 14% rout.
While trying to analyze the results, the campaigns that both Shulman and Garrett ran - including the late-in-the-game influx of disgraceful ads paid for by the NRCC and the results of past races, we came up with more questions than answers. The biggest and first question is whether this district is even remotely winnable by a Democrat. We say this not as fatalists, but as people who have realized the value that building up a sustainable infrastructure can bring, as people who know how very different each county is within the district and as people who can sense some very basic flaws in what little infrastructure has been built up in the district. On a more fundamental level, we wonder if the Fifth has earned the respect to receive an earlier endorsement as a "Red to Blue" district or earlier financial support from the DCCC - both of which could have certainly helped, but the distinction and funds may have also been better served in more winnable races earlier in the cycle.
Before looking at the vote breakdown, and trying to see where things could have changed in this cycle, it is fairly evident that the district will be extremely tough to win in one cycle - especially if we don't start to build up critical infrastructure now. In Bergen County, the BCDO is a mess, to say the least, with Ferriero in, shall we say, "hot water," and no indication as to if or when he will step down from his Chairmanship. With this matter still in limbo, it would be very difficult for a Democrat to run on a "clean government" platform and be taken seriously enough to flip a 53/47 deficit to a 52/48 win in the county. It isn't an accident that there was such a disappointment that even the top Democratic Freeholders saw a near 20% dropoff in her votes from Obama, as noted today in the Bergen Record.
This is the inspiring speech that was delivered on Tuesday night. (The first three minutes are missing due to YouTube time limits).
Garrett can only become weaker as more and more of his constituents discover what/who he truly is. I hope Shulman comes back strong in 2010 and completes the job he started this year.
Obama should win with little difficulty in this reliably Democratic state, but two House seats are tossups, and a third is a potential upset. In the 3rd District, GOP Rep. H. James Saxton is retiring after 12 terms, but Democratic challenger John Adler, a state senator from Cherry Hill, has strong party backing and has assembled one of the best field organizations in the country against Chris Myers, a Lockheed Martin executive and Republican mayor of Medford.
The 7th District, also a GOP-created vacancy, had been viewed as friendlier to Republicans, but Democratic state legislator Linda Stender has proven a tough competitor against state Sen. Leonard Lance. Republicans are less worried about, but still distracted by, the 5th District race, featuring Dennis Shulman, a blind rabbi endorsed by New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), against GOP Rep. Scott Garrett. Democratic Sen. Frank Lautenberg is expected to win easily over former congressman Dick Zimmer.
Lets hope that field organization pulls Adler across the finish line in NJ-3 and the Republicans are so distracted by the Shulman campaign in the 5th, they lose both NJ-5 and NJ-7. Best of luck to all of our campaigns.
NJ-05 (Garrett): Likely Republican to Lean Republican
This expensive, Republican-leaning district on New Jersey's northern border was always going to be a tough nut to crack. But it looks like rabbi & psychologist Dennis Shulman has closed a lot of ground with uber-wingnut Scott Garrett and could be poised to deliver an upset. Shulman, a first-time candidate, has raised almost a million bucks and just got a dose of help from the DCCC.
He's also gotten under Garrett's skin, prompting shrill freak-outs and bizarre attacks. The only public polls of this race (by R2K) showed nice momentum for Shulman, while Garrett dangled below 50. It would still be an upset if Shulman were to win here, but a Dem victory now looks much more possible than at any time in the past. (David)
Shulman has incredible momentum at the moment, and with a week or two more this could be a tossup. As it is, he stands a legitimate shot at pulling off the upset here.
It has been one crazy week for Dennis Shulman in his bid to unseat Scott Garrett in NJ-5.
On Monday, we learned that even Republicans think Garrett is a nut.
On Tuesday, Dennis scores a huge endorsement from former-republican Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and together, they proceed to take it to Garrett in a big way.
Wednesday brought word that Garrett had been caught dodging the media in a positively Kean-ian display of a flailing campaign.
Yesterday, Democracy for America showed up with money and volunteers, Open Left moved the race to "leans republican" from "likely republican," and the campaign released a compelling video that leaves no doubt Dennis belongs in the Congress.
And today - the big guns came to town in support, with DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen and Congressmen Pallone, Pascrell, and Rothman came a-stumpin' for Dennis, to fire up the ground game in Paramus ahead of GOTV weekend.
I just got back from a rally in Paramus for Dennis Shulman's campaign where three current NJ Congressmen (Pallone, Rothman, Pascrell) and DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen railed against Scott Garrett's disgusting personal attacks against Dennis, as well as talked about how out of step and out of touch Garrett is.
In addition to the radical and narrow ideology as well as his votes against the GI Bill, the Voting Rights Act reauthorization, SCHIP, mental health parity for veterans and a whole slew of others that people in this district would be appalled if they knew about, Van Hollen indicated that on behalf of the DCCC, he is providing close to $85,000 for the final weekend push here.
Dennis has already said that much of it will be used to blanket the airwaves to counter Garrett's insidious ads and to bring the campaign across the finish line.
Also, today brought another endorsement of Shulman - the Bergen Record, adding to the impressive list of businesspeople, politicians and organizations who have endorsed the common sense solutions oriented approach of Dennis over the radical out of touch Garrett.
In today?s Bergen Record, there is an article about guns and the race here in NJ-5 between Dennis Shulman and Scott Garrett. And in this article (not surprisingly) is a number of thoughts, mischaracterizations and outright misleading comments about Dennis Shulman and his views on gun ownership.
In the press conference announcing Mayor Michael Bloomberg?s endorsement of Shulman, both of them had a lot to say about guns and gun ownership. Not surprisingly, none of this seems to matter to Garrett as he panders to gun owners? fears about the ?evil lib?rul boogyman who wants to take all of your guns away?. And the following comment by a Garrett supporter is quite telling of the fearmongering that Garrett has resorted to:
Gas station owner Bob Guidone of Wantage received his postcard in the mail on Monday, but didn't need any convincing. He's a big Garrett supporter, and says the incumbent understands his constituents.
"Up here, we like our freedom and we do like to hunt," Guidone said. The biggest issue for Guidone is his right to bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and he's suspicious of what Obama's recent pledge to "redistribute the wealth" would mean for a small business owner like himself.
"We work hard and we don't rely on government handouts," he said. "And don't forget that Hitler took all the guns away. That's how he took over Germany."
Yes, Hitler and a rabbi from Northern New Jersey have a LOT in common. Right?.
The reality is, Shulman is against a few very sensible things relating to guns ? none of which apply to anyone that isn?t, quite frankly, such a fanatic that they are willing to put the safety of children and innocent citizens about their own extreme narrow and uncompromising agenda. And so I will put it very clearly (as both Shulman and Bloomberg said very clearly on numerous occasions):
Dennis Shulman does not want to, nor has he said that he has any interest in ?taking guns away? from hunters or gun owners who are not criminals.
Period.
What Shulman has said is that he can?t understand why lawful gun owners and hunters either can?t see the difference between (or are being duped by the NRA) child safety locks on guns so that kids don?t accidentally shoot themselves in the head. Or the difference between hunting or collecting guns and loopholes that allow gun dealers who have lost their license to sell guns being able to sell them on the streets ? getting them into the hands of criminals who kill innocent bystanders, whether they are teens or soldiers.
It is really that straightforward. Hunters will keep their guns. Anyone who says otherwise is either lying or, well, lying. To make a vote based on false beliefs is a shame and a travesty that someone is either willfully or willingly uninformed when making such a huge decision.
And it is time that gun owners, gun collectors and hunters in NJ-5 know the truth about Dennis Shulman, as well as the misleading information they are getting from Scott Garrett and the NRA.
A lot of great media has been produced over the last few years in New Jersey Democratic politics, at the professional level, by amateurs, and a number of activists in the middle. This new video released by Dennis Shulman's campaign might be my favorite positive piece of supporter-produced media yet.
Filmmaker Matt Kohn spent some time with Shulman and produced a really fantastic piece of video highlighting his interactions with voters, his personal story, and his pitch to the voters of the fifth - "sensible leadership" and the importance to all of us of being able to feel proud of our country. Spend a few minutes and check it out:
I think we've all got to give the Shulman campaign a lot of credit. Without the early and automatic establishment backing that other Congressional campaigns enjoyed elsewhere in the state -- and in a district that has not been kind to Democrats -- they have run a stellar campaign from the beginning, and never once let up. The Shulman campaign in the fifth district would not likely be on anyone's radar this year had Dennis and his team not worked as hard as they have. And to their credit, they've got us all paying attention.
I signed up at MyBO, and proceeded to create canvass events in my area, joined all the groups around my area.
I get at least 4-5 emails every day about recruiting people for PA, enough already. Obama is up in PA almost as much as in New Jersey.
I kept hearing about how Obama thought the down ticket races are so important, but come on enough is enough. Obama sent an email out to Obama supporters in NJ-11, asking them to vote for Frank Lautenberg, with no mention of Tom Wyka, whats up with that ?
Is Obama coat tails going to make up the split for Tom Wyka, or Dennis Shulman, could Linda Stender use 80 more canvassers ? What about Adler.. hes up in the polls, but gheesh.
SO My friends and I have run roll playing training sessions for people that have never canvassed before. But I had one lady in Livingston quit after an hour, and I paired her with an experienced canvasser. SIGH.
I see 4 Congressional races that in the right conditions, coat tails, that we could flip, and with Obama leading Tom Wyka in NJ-11, thats going to be important.
But PA is in good shape in the polls, when do I get my best peole back? Nov 5th?
It's been a pretty good week for Dennis Shulman in his effort to push Scott Garrett out of office, and it's only Tuesday. In the latest news, CeaseFireNJ, a gun safety organization, endorsed a bunch of incumbents plus Shulman as the only challenger.
This follows New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg's endorsement of Shulman and Scott Garrett turned chicken when a reporter tried to answer him a question. Then there's the whole "Garrett's a nut" issue from yesterday.
The other endorsements are Senator Frank Lautenberg, Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ4), Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ6), Rep Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ8), Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ9), Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ12) and Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ13).
No endorsements were made in NJ1, NJ2, NJ3, NJ7, NJ10 or NJ11.
Things seem to be going so well on the campaign trail for Scott Garrett in his 5th Congressional District race against Dennis Shulman, that he has a new tactic for dealing with the media:That's right, just walk away.
Bloomberg made a brief opening statement and took questions for approximately 20 minutes - most of the salient points from the Q/A session are below - before turning the press conference over to Dennis, who made a statement and then took questions for another 20 minutes.
In his opening statement Mayor Bloomberg indicated that he was impressed by Dennis' pragmatic sensible approach to tough issues, including the economy and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. In endorsing Shulman, Bloomberg indicated that Congress needed more members to focus on reaching across the aisle for problem solving and not ideology, an obvious point aimed at incumbent Garrett's rigid and narrow ideological view - something that was touched on throughout the press conference.
In talking about Shulman's background, Bloomberg urged district to vote for Dennis.
The following is excerpted from Shulman's statement thanking Bloomberg for his support:
I am so honored to have this endorsement. [Mayor Bloomberg's] record of accomplishments as businessman, civic leader and elected official has been an inspiration in my run for office. I have long admired Mayor Bloomberg's steady leadership in NYC. He sees problems as solvable and not an opportunity to apply extreme ideology. This is what the voters of NJ's fifth district need. For too long we have had a Representative that has failed us on the economy. For too long, our Representative has pursued a rigid narrow approach to economic issues we face in NJ and the nation. We don't need more erratic decision makers. We need more independence as the Mayor has demonstrated repeated. We need a Representative that shares the Mayor's flexibility and problem solving approach. Mayor Bloomberg is not a career politician but ha a common sense pragmatic approach to government. I will apply the Mayor's problem solving perspective to the challenges we face as a nation.
The press conference had participation from a number of NY and NJ based papers, and some of the questions are below. Bloomberg indicated that he did not foresee contributing any money to this race and would probably not be making many (if any) additional endorsements this campaign season; however he would absolutely let the Shulman campaign use his endorsement and statement in an advertisement. Shulman pointed out that while they didn't know how they would use the endorsement yet, it is wonderful that he decided to cross the aisle and the Hudson and we will make sure people know about the endorsement.
A big issue for the Mayor was that of gun violence and Bloomberg mentioned this in response to questions from The Bergen Record's Herb Jackson as well as the New York Daily News, referencing the work that Newark Mayor Cory Booker has done to try and tackle this issue:
Herb Jackson : How much of this endorsement has to do with Garrett's record with respect to the NRA?
Mayor Bloomberg [A very] big issue is to protect police officers and make sure children don't get shot by random bullets. Congress' protection of criminals with guns is "disgraceful", especially on gun show loopholes and how Congress walked away from rule on dealer losing license that now allows sales of guns on the streets to anyone. There is no longer a ban on assault rifles. Dennis will stand up to change these things and his opponent "for reasons I can not fathom" will not. How can you not stand up to criminals?
Dennis was also asked about guns by the Ledger in light of the fact that this has not been a major campaign issue to date. Dennis responded with a story about his experiences as a psychologist who treated parents of children killed by handguns:
Shulman: One of the positions where Garrett is way over the line is his being against child safety locks. As a psychologist, I treated a number of parents whose kids died from playing in neighbor's home with a gun that had no lock. No matter how you feel about the other issues related to gun control (and I am not interested in taking licensed guns from hunters who aren't criminals), child safety locks is an ethical issue. There is no reason we can't support a bill that has child safety locks and I will address this when I get to Congress.
So why would people in this District, especially those who don't live in Bergen County, care about this endorsement? That very question was asked by the NJ Herald, a Sussex County paper. Dennis responded by talking about his background as a problem solver, as well as Mayor Bloomberg's background as a problem solver - things that are not being applied in the current Congress, especially by the current Representative:
Shulman: People throughout the district are interested in endorsement because Mayor Bloomberg represents someone who is a problem solver. Garrett is committed to ideology not problem solving. He votes with a rigid and narrow ideology. [Former District Representative] Marge Roukema referred to him as a "right wing extremist". Bloomberg is not endorsing many congressional candidates, and he represents the opposite of Garrett - a problem solver, one who proposes solutions and doesn't look into a playbook in order to figure out what to say. That is what our country needs and that is what I also represent.
With momentum skyrocketing in our race to unseat the Michele Bachmann of the East, Scott Garrett, Dennis spent yesterday meeting voters throughout NJ-5. And the bottom line, no matter where we go, is that people are sick and tired of their representative continually putting ideology before pragmatism...
Herb Jackson is doing a series of Qs and As with Dennis Shulman and Rep. Scott Garrett on various issues. Here is part of Shulman's response regarding abortion.
My wife's an obstetrician-gynecologist. When she was in medical school ... there were still wards at the hospital at Columbia of women who were dying from illegal abortions. I think what people don't appreciate when they talk about the sacredness of life is that in any country where abortion is illegal we end up with women who die from illegal abortions. ... Abortion has to be discouraged, but it should never be made a constitutional amendment and never be made illegal.
The only place where I disagree is in tone, and not in substance. Abortion should be discouraged just as any surgery should be if it is not necessary, but the discouragement should be in the form of extended education of birth control options and not the shame right wingers want to use. It should be preventative as opposed to coercive.
Reducing abortion should be a goal, because it is a physical invasion of the body that can be prevented by preventing pregnancies. Too often when we hear "abortion should be discouraged" it means we should shame women into carrying through with an unwanted pregnancy, and that's not right.
